hcloud_list_projects

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered by structured data. The description adds nothing beyond that: no statement about result volume, whether the list is scoped to the caller's credentials/domain, or whether pagination applies. For an open-world listing call, the caller is left to discover the scope by trial.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Four words, front-loaded with the verb, with no filler or redundant restatement of the title. Nothing could be trimmed without losing content.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a zero-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description needs to convey what comes back and how broad the result is. It conveys neither, but the tool is simple enough that an agent can still call it correctly on the first attempt, so this is a noticeable rather than fatal gap.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool takes zero parameters, which is the baseline-4 case; there are no arguments whose meaning could be clarified. The description does not need to explain any input, though it could have noted that no filters exist.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

"List IAM projects" gives a specific verb and a qualified resource, so the basic action is clear. But the sibling set contains many other project-listing tools (hcloud_list_sms_migration_projects, hcloud_list_codearts_projects, hcloud_list_dataarts_workspaces), and the description does nothing to establish that this one is the IAM/identity-domain project list rather than any of those.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites, and no reference to any alternative sibling tool. The agent must infer from the name alone that this is the entry point for IAM project discovery.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.